Alstein

PC: Team Fortress 2/ Civ IV in a tie. Console: Virtua Fighter 5

The last thing either party wants is a bunch of young folks angry at them and willing to vote. They'll vote to break the system.

I think the 2nd expansion for Elemental would be a good test case for 64-bit and how it goes. Reasoning: a good number of folks would be getting the game for free, provided Stardock keeps its promise in that regard (the pre-order folks). Trying something experimental would make sense, provided FE ends up being what it has the potential of being. I assume that after that 2nd game, it's on to GalCiv III in 2015 or so, if 64-b

It's been announced that WOM owners get a discount on FE, though unsure if someone who gets it this late will get anything.

One question: what's the difficulty with making a game 64-bit? Does it make doing a game easier or harder? I'm curious if this is an engineering issue, or just an accessibility issue?

This is the most I've ever wanted a terrible disease.

Yes, I have two laptops, each running 64-bit Windows 7. I bought machines specifically because I thought 64-bit would be here by now. Would it make me more likely to buy a game? I'd say yes, but it wouldn't be a sole reason to buy a game. I think Valve's statistics on Steam show only about 10% of their users are still on 32-bit. (can't remember an exact source though) The qu

No problem with the rule itself , but oftentimes topics from those places bleed out over here and vice versa. It's a problem with Stardock forums in general, and one I've complained about for years.

I think this is important as well.

Fallen Enchantress= possibility for fanservice. Seriously though, I do kinda wish we had some more fanservice potential in Stardock games. (watches as Brad adds a fujoshi to the staff)

He won't be able to say. Paradox NDA's are pretty hardcore.

[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="59" id="3050015"]They are getting a new one from Paradox pretty soon I think. Warlock? [/quote] I think that's Q2, so it's a while off.

I think how this game gets marketed is going to be determined heavily by us folks who are getting it early. If we dig it, and let the word out, folks are going to give it a chance. If we're not digging it, the franchise is toast. One question: are there still plans for a third Elemental game besides the RPG like originally intended, provided this does well?

Ultimately, I think if this game is any good, the open beta will give it a good vibe, and people will give it a chance, especially since it will be on Steam when it's ready. I think even with the free copies, being on Steam and that expanded market will ensure that FE at least breaks even if the game meets GC2's quality standards.

Hopefully- we can say this: "It's a good game."

[quote who="marionesi" reply="20" id="3049135"] I agree. More simply, I'd say that to have fun there must be interesting trade-offs, as Derek pointed out. This may be, but it not limited to, risk. So I agree that sending out immortal champs is no risk, so no interesting tradeoff, hence no fun. A permanent scar may also me too small a risk to make an interesting tradeoff. A scar, some significant downtime, loss of experience, loss of some items, et cetera may balance it in t

Also, Brad only sleeps 2-3 hrs a day , so he has plenty of time to do other stuff. Some folks are like that. I often can get by on 3 hrs of sleep a day myself.

I like the idea of Champs being able to capture of kill other champs. Capturing champs= ransom demand or imprison (you get the champ back if you defeat their sovereign) Whether a champion is defeated, captured, or killed should be RNG, maybe with modifiers based on promotions (bloodlust might mean they are more likely to kill champs instead of capture or defeat) I would like to see something like Charisma of champion + 1d10 be used to break ties in initiative, thou

That's actually a solid idea, have champions age and start losing stats if they get old. You can retire them, and they'll have successors you get down the road who will start off as very promising lvl 1's. That said, one of the wounds a champion can get can make them sterile and unable to procreate. "He took an arrow, but it wasn't to the knee."

Steam isn't necessary for a game to be successful, but it helps. That said, I think FE on Steam will outsell WOM if the game reaches its potential. (note: the free copies being given out won't count) That said, question. I know and accept SD keys aren't Steam-transferrable. What would it cost Stardock to make a key for Valve. Why not allow folks who have bought GalCiv II/Sins/FE to purchase keys from Stardock to

He wasn't making the stuff, he was just selling it. There's a huge difference there. One comment of my own: I am much more willing to give a company a second chance if it has proven that it at least tries to do the right things, to both customers and employees (worker and consumer rights are big issues with me). If a company has a reputation for milking its customers unfairly and/or mistreating its workers, I am less likely to forgive mis

They haven't put in all the graphics into the alpha yet, that may be the reason why it looks drab right now.

Hmm, you can't have the same treaty with every player? Will Diplomacy tech upgrade the value of those treaties? I always felt the GC2 treaties were a good idea that needed more work, but didn't work that well in WOM, so curious to see what the changes are. I really would like to see a dev diary on this stuff and how it works. One thing I would like to see is tech diffusion via treaties. Having treaties with an empir

How about (I keep suggesting this, but AI's should be as customized as possible, as every player has different optimum preferences) a ruthless AI that roleplays. A truly Ruthless AI would backstab everyone like a human, but I generally don't do that as a player. Ultimately, what I want from an AI is for it to play by the same rules they do. Not everybody plays by my rules. In GC2, there were a few things I didn't do, because I felt it explo

My suggestion in that regard was to give the AIs "luck" against monsters. As in, AI/monster battles are fought twice in the background, and the AI gets the best result. (As a toggle of course) My justification is that if humans are unlucky vs monsters, they tend to save/reload. This would be a compensation. If monsters just ignore an AI and attack a human, it's an obvious cheat. If an AI wins a 40% battle vs monsters 64